“You are going to have some people who never, never go there,” Representative Steve LaTourette, an Ohio Republican, told reporters, referring to a small number of Republicans who will not countenance any talk of gun regulation.

“But yes, I think most Republicans are willing to have a very, very serious conversation about what this means and taking a second look at what the Second Amendment (guaranteeing the right to bear arms) means in the 21st century,” he said.

***

Boehner said the GOP’s strategy would be to examine the reasons that the mass shootings of recent years have been carried out, almost exclusively, by young, white males with mental illnesses, according to the lawmaker in the room.

“We need to have a discussion about guns,” the lawmaker said, relaying Boehner’s remarks, “and that doesn’t mean that all of a sudden we abandon the Second Amendment or the NRA [National Rifle Association] or anything like that. But there needs to be a discussion and everybody needs to participate and we need to depoliticize it.”

Boehner also told Republicans that they need to be “circumspect” in their observations, the lawmaker said, warning that “it’s not helpful” for lawmakers to call for arming teachers as a way to prevent mass shootings.

***

No reasonable person, and that includes millions of gun owners, wants to repeal the Second Amendment – though I suspect more than a few liberals would like to if they could. But no reasonable person can make the case any longer that civilians need semi-automatic weapons and clips that hold 100 bullets…

The First Amendment guarantees all of us freedom of speech. But we can’t shout fire in a crowded theater if there is no fire, and we can’t libel decent people with made up stories designed to hurt them. No rights are absolute.

But on many issues Republicans aren’t smart. So when Congress convenes in January, and gun legislation is brought up on Day One, some Republicans will vote No on the assault weapon ban. If too many vote that way, it will be another self-inflicted wound for the GOP, more proof that they’re out of touch with the American people.

In announcing the sale of the gun manufacturer, the private equity firm Cerberus Capital Management made clear that the decision stemmed from the killings at Sandy Hook Elementary School, in Newtown, Conn. “It is apparent that the Sandy Hook tragedy was a watershed event that has raised the national debate on gun control to an unprecedented level,” Cerberus said in a news release.

The firm said it planned to sell the Freedom Group, which makes the .223 Bushmaster rifle used in the massacre. Cerberus acquired Bushmaster in 2006, later merging it with other gun companies to create the Freedom Group.

***

1. Institutions can change. The NRA has become an implacable foe of gun control but that doesn’t mean it will always be. There could be glasnost in the NRA Kremlin, a recognition that the world has changed. It’s not a perfect analogy by any means but auto companies opposed seat belts and then accepted them as standard equipment. They fought air bags and then accepted them.

2. Hunters might triumph over the automatic crowd. At some point, it’s possible that hunters will feel less threatened by the spectre of gun control laws and be willing to assert themselves more. Of course, hunters are no more monolithic than “drivers” or “students” but they may not see themselves as having a vested interest in enormous magazines.

3. The NRA supported the 1934 Firearms Act, aimed at “gangster weapons” and the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 which prohibited interstate trade in handguns. Could the NRA be persuaded to support something to curtail the easy availability of guns of mass destruction? Right now, it’s inconceivable. In a year?

***

The partisan differences persist, however, across almost every demographic measure. White voters were substantially more likely to own guns than Hispanics, blacks or Asians. But white Republicans were more likely to own guns than white Democrats, Asian Republicans more likely than Asian Democrats, and so forth.

And based on demographic inertia, the differences seem likely to grow over time. About 35 percent of Democratic voters aged 65 and older reported having a gun in their home, against about 25 percent of those aged 18 to 29. But gun ownership rates bore little relationship to age among Republican voters, and were constant at about 55 percent among all age groups. That might suggest that gun ownership will continue to decline among Democrats while holding steady among Republicans, further increasing the partisan gap.

The rate of gun ownership is higher in rural areas than in urban areas, but the murder rate is higher in urban areas. The rate of gun ownership is higher among whites than among blacks, but the murder rate is higher among blacks. For the country as a whole, hand-gun ownership doubled in the late 20th century, while the murder rate went down.

The few counter-examples offered by gun-control zealots do not stand up under scrutiny. Perhaps their strongest talking point is that Britain has stronger gun-control laws than the United States and lower murder rates…

There is innocent ignorance and there is invincible, dogmatic, and self-righteous ignorance. Every tragic mass shooting seems to bring out examples of both among gun-control advocates.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Comments

Hate to wax Cindy Munford here, but I love you guys. Take it how you list. True, it’s like walking around the Island of Misfit Toys and everything, but — other strange places on the interwebs just aren’t like this strange thing.

You too AP, for rolling with it.

It’s a break in the pain talking, so no one feel too warm. Exist Resist — get as warm as you’d like. :)

concludes with -
…When I carry a gun, I don’t do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I’m looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don’t carry it because I’m afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn’t limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation…and that’s why carrying a gun is a civilized act.”

Why the f**k does the GOP have to cave on every goddamn thing? Why the f**K do they have cede ground to the f**king liberals every goddamn time there’s a debate going on? They can’t even f**king stand up for the 2nd Amendment now? “We have to have look at what the 2nd Amendment mean in the 21st century”? What the f**k is that? What the f**k does that mean?

This is not an issue of gun law, gun control, or assault weapons bans. This is an issue of mental health care.

thatsafactjack on December 19, 2012 at 1:31 AM

Your talking facts here. The left isn’t interested. Neither are many Republicans. It’s about the gun.

In fact,they are now rushing to get a deal done on the fiscal cliff so they can get to banning our guns. You might say, if it wasn’t for the fiscal cliff talks they would have already voted for the assault ban.

But I’m telling you… they are not going to just renew the old ban. They are going to go for everything they can get. They may even try to ban all semi-autos. Thank God there are no gun lawsuits before the court at the moment or they would rule against the 2nd amendment.

I can see Nancy Pelosi… heck , maybe it’ll be Boehner himself saying ..”We have to pass this gun ban so that we can see what’s in this gun ban!”

They’ll write the law after they pass it.

Unless the American people make their voices heard!
Join the NRA! Join every legitimate gun group there is! We have got to make our voices heard on this or it’s over.

Call the Republicans over and over and over! Do not let them go to sleep at night thinking we support gun bans!

Anybody thinking all they are going to do is pass the old assault weapons ban is fooling themselves. The Obama regime will not be satisfied with that!

Expect an attempt to ban all semi-autos! Mandated new storage laws. New police powers to enter houses and check to see if your guns are stored properly. More restrictions on concealed carry. More mandatory gun free zones.

Does it not seem like we have been in a perpetual crisis the last 4 years? And it’s getting worse. It’s like one freaking crisis after another.

Welcome to politics in the new Amerika.

A crisis happens.. real or imagined. And the left will accuse you of murder. Mobs will riot outside of your house. They will spit on you, threaten you and rage against you and this is who we’re suppose to work with? There is not reasoning hear!

Does it not seem like we have been in a perpetual crisis the last 4 years? And it’s getting worse. It’s like one freaking crisis after another.

Yes, and the true crisis is our irresponsible spending and weak willed and self serving politicians. We need to let the country go over the cliff, let sequestration take affect then rebuild a responsible nation. I’m 75 and I’ll feel the pain of all the cuts but I’m ready to do that if it saves the future for my kids and grandkids.

Why the f**k does the GOP have to cave on every goddamn thing? Why the f**K do they have cede ground to the f**king liberals every goddamn time there’s a debate going on? They can’t even f**king stand up for the 2nd Amendment now? “We have to have look at what the 2nd Amendment mean in the 21st century”? What the f**k is that? What the f**k does that mean?

BOR doubled down last night on the tightening the rules, whatever that means, on assault weapons, whatever that means. Every time the rules are tightened, we lose a little more freedom. He doesn’t like the ARs and doesn’t think we need them. He has lawyers on the show and argues against the laws with them. He argues against the constitution and doesn’t even realize it. Boxer is readying another ban on assault weapons meaning more infringement on our constitution.

BOR doubled down last night on the tightening the rules, whatever that means, on assault weapons, whatever that means.
Kissmygrits on December 19, 2012 at 8:44 AM

BOR is one of those “I want to be loved by the media” John Roberts types. I think it was Monday when he used the term AK15. He doesn’t like the big bad evil black rifle because it looks scary. Complete idiot. Ted Nugent took him to task on the radio the next day.

It probably won’t help but I’m stopping by my Congressman’s office today since it’s about 2 miles away. He’s an R, not that that means anything. Sometimes a personal visit makes more of an impact than a call or email and I want his office to know Boner needs to go. NOW.

BOR doubled down last night on the tightening the rules, whatever that means, on assault weapons, whatever that means. Every time the rules are tightened, we lose a little more freedom. He doesn’t like the ARs and doesn’t think we need them. He has lawyers on the show and argues against the laws with them. He argues against the constitution and doesn’t even realize it. Boxer is readying another ban on assault weapons meaning more infringement on our constitution.

Kissmygrits on December 19, 2012 at 8:44 AM

I saw that. Wanted to grab him by the neck.
It’s like he doesn’t even know what a semi automatic weapon is. He say’s that there is no need for weapons like the AR. (What does some relativistic definition of need have to do with your 2nd A rights?) Does he think they are fully automatic weapons??..is it the size of the magazine??..is it their shape??..What?

I hate to rain on some people’s gun parade here, but there probably is some sense in Republicans joining in tightening regulations on guns that can shoot hundreds of bullets without reloading, while not affecting the law-abiding citizen who wants a handgun for self-protection.

We keep hearing these calls for gun control every time some nutcase goes crazy and shoots dozens of people in a public place, such as the Newtown school shooting, the mass-shooting in the movie theater in Colorado earlier this year, or the mass-shooting at Virginia Tech a few years ago.

Most handguns can only shoot 6 rounds without reloading, which is enough for a law-abiding citizen to protect him/herself from a burglar, unless the house is attacked by a gang of more than 6 burglars, which is very rare.

But if the Newtown or Aurora CO shooters only had a handgun, the shooter would have had to reload after firing 6 shots, which would have given people time to intervene before police arrive, by attempting to tackle the shooter, and probably saved many lives.

Most gun-owners and/or game hunters outside the police and military would probably not object to being limited to handguns and rifles. From a political point of view, this would make Republicans appear “reasonable” and willing to work to prevent mass-murders, while preserving Second Amendment rights for those who own guns for self-protection and/or hunting.

Is another thousand gun laws going to change criminals that use guns? I guess politicians and some people think that it will. Someone once said doing the same thing over and over and hoping for a change is insanity applies here in capital letters. Do they ever think of changing the punishment for armed crime? I guess they have because you can get more time in prison for stealing money than murder, some change. Our whole system of punishment has changed to prisons that in reality are fenced health clubs. Sheriff Jo’s runs a prison and gets re elected by an 85% vote. The media is unusually quiet about the positive things this sheriff has accomplished. I’m for bringing back the whipping post that the Brits took off their punishment program in 1948. Maybe a wife beater would change his mind after thirty lashes with the cat-O-nine tails. Maybe some punk teenager would change his habits from beating a senior citizen to a pulp after forty lashes. Maybe fifty lashes for a crime committed with a gun just short of murder. Something different needs to be thought about besides another piece of paper added to an already stack of paper that does nothing to correct a crime.

The bottom line is that the gun banners track record leads those of us who want the civil right of self-defense to treat any of their proposals as a hudna, the truce Muslims propose with infidels to allow them to build up enough strength to win by outright force. Better not to play at all.